DIVORCE CAUSES.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 174, 25 July 1928, Page 10

DIVORCE CAUSES.

HIGH COURT POWERS. ALIMONY AND MAINTENANCE. AMENDING BILL INTRODUCED. (By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, Tuesday. The Supreme Court of New Zealand is given the additional powers possessed by the High Court of England by a clause in the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Bill introduced by Governor-Gen-eral's Message in the House of Representatives this evening. The clause related to alimony and maintenance, and is taken from the English Act of 102.3. It rids New Zealand law of confusion created by apparently conflicting provisions of the Act of 190 S. This bill contains .">S clauses, and. while primarily a consolidating measure. I it amends the law in certain important respects since it has been deemed wise to take advantage of improvements made in the English Act. One of these is the use of the word "divorce." instead of "dissolution of marriage."' Failure to comply with a decree for restitution

of conjugal rights is made a ground for judicial separation, as it is in England. This also remains a ground for divorce in New Zealand. The rule as to the retention of her domicile by a deserted wife, notwithstanding that her hubsand has changed his domicile, is extended so as to apply to the case of a wife who has been separated from her husband by agreement or otherwise. The subject of collusion has been cleared up. the law being declared that, except in the case of adultery, collusion is only a discretionary bar to relief. It has also been made clear that connivance is a bar in the case of adultery only. This is necessary, since it is absurd to talk about connivance when relief is sought on other grounds, such as the existence of an agreement for separation. Until the Divorce Act of IS9B was brought into operation a wife could not obtain divorce on the ground of adultery only, unless it was incestuous adultery or accompanied by bigamy. She had to prove, in addition, either cruelty or desertion for two years. The Act of ISOS altered the law on the subject, and gave the wife the right to obtain divorce on the ground of adultery if committed after the Act of ItfOS came into force. After a lapse of 29 years it seems unnecessary to maintain the distinction. and it ha-;, therefore. been abolished. The chance of there being a case where a wife desired divorce because her husband had committed adultery prior to June 1. IS9S and had not committed any matrimonial offence since, is remote indeed. Although the Minister of Justice has not explained the bill to the House, intelligent reading of the measure does not indicate that grounds for divorce in New Zealand have been increased, only ten cases being mentioned—adultery, wilful desertion, habitual drunkenness, seven years' imprisonment for murder or attempted murder gf petitioner of children, or wounding or causing them actual bodily harm, insanity (two classes). failure to comply with an order for restitution, agreement for separation in force for three yea r s, and judicial separation for a similar period.